Posted on 11/20/2013 5:58:03 AM PST by Red in Blue PA
Some drivers along a busy Fort Worth street on Friday were stopped at police roadblock and directed into a parking lot, where they were asked by federal contractors for samples of their breath, saliva and even blood. It was part of a government research study aimed at determining the number of drunken or drug-impaired drivers. "It just doesn't seem right that you can be forced off the road when you're not doing anything wrong," said Kim Cope, who said she was on her lunch break when she was forced to pull over at the roadblock on Beach Street in North Fort Worth.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.nbcnews.com ...
Just another way the federalies are getting American’s used to be “frisked”, in public. First frisked in airports, now being pulled over to give blood and saliva, in public. What next? Need to rid this country of these bullies in our government. If they want to frisk anyone, why don’t they start in Dearborn, MI where we have a bunch of jihadists? (living in public housing, yet)
As a retired LEO the only response is Am I being detained? Following their mumbling response with, am I free to go?
Cops don’t like being told no, but even worse is a citizen who reminds them of their constitutional authority. A lot of evidence is collected from complaint citizens. Cops need documentable probable cause to conduct these seizures and they know it.
I expect their collection process includes a signed waiver of your rights.
Your call if you want to cooperation, but suggest you turn on the video camera on your phone. Cops hate to have their actions recorded.
Betcha there is something else BIO in the wild and they’re trying to locate it, isolate it with this “survey” as the cover story.
I believe it also requires a search warrant, but then again, I'm not a lawyer and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night.
Their mistake was saying they were testing for alcohol. Limit it to illegal drugs and few people would care.
Doesn't that seem to provoke even more bizarre behavior by the LEO's and put you at risk of further abusive behavior? Just asking. Would like your perspective as a retired LEO.
What have we become? What are we allowing. Drugs or not, everyone ought to care!
Maybe they’re incorporated? There’s a small area near Richardson that is incorporated. Richardson doesn’t sell alcohol, but the incorporated area called Buckingham does. Opposite of your situation.
I certainly see your point, but I think things start to go south when a citizen starts videotaping, although it shouldn’t. But, in a court of law we all understand what occurs, judges are almost universally predisposed to believe the LEO regardless, so video taping the incident, regrettably, is your only viable protection.
Or English in parts of Miami. :-)
Another reason NOT to support Rick Perry for president.
When the REPUBLICAN party starts representing itself as THE party that will cut and reduce Federal invasion and intrusion on individual rights, it will start winning.
It’s all about conditioning, no other reasons. TSA at bus stops and train stations. Border patrol with checkpoints 100 miles inland from the border. Warrantless searches following the Boston bombing and barely a peep from the people affected. They have a plan, and it is working.
I agree.
On the flip side, if the LEO decides to beat/abuse you anyway, would you rather it be you-said-he-said or he-said-the-video-recorded?
You, the victim, are not responsible for your abusers actions.
Recording the incident does not make you responsible.
The government employee has responsibility for his own behavior.
I wasn’t suggesting to not video the encounter, I just wanted to hear a retired LEO’s perspective on the matter as far as it causing an escalation of the situation on the LEO’s part.
That is an interesting question in this context.
I am trying to imagine this situation.
You are ordered into a parking lot....then what. Ordered out of your car? Ordered to breathe into a breathalyzer, then ordered to submit saliva, and then blood?
So where in any of this is probable cause? I am somewhat understanding of a checkpoint where you roll down your window...most people who have had a couple of drinks, reek of alcohol...it’s unmistakable. So the question of: have you been drinking, is really a trick since they are asking a question they already know the answer to.
But in this case, where is the probable cause for a field sobriety test that is this invasive? If you cannot smell it on my person, then why would one need to submit samples like this?
In most places, I would assume, that refusal of a field sobriety test is the equivalent of an admission of guilt, and your license is suspended immediately and the maximum penalty is meted out at your court date.
You did an excellent job on this video Travis. I’ll be sharing it with friends.
Bookmark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.